Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Why women are the enemy of working mothers

It's broader than enmity to new mothers who work.  Women are great at tearing ALL other women down.  The "Sisterhood" is a myth.  Even your friends probably bad-mouth you behind your back.  Consciously or subconciously, most women see themselves as engaged in a never-ending competition for the affections of men, so regard all other women as potential rivals who have to be torn down.  And it's not unreasonable.  When men are inclined to "stray", there is usually a woman willing to stray with them

NEW mothers who return to work beware — women are out to get you.

Only 41 per cent of women would support a friend who chooses to go back to employment after having kids if they are not the primary breadwinner, according to a new survey.

But that figure rose to 89 per cent if the woman earned more than her partner, according to the survey of 2000 women by cosmetics company Heat.

Only about 14 per cent of households with dependent children under 15 are headed by a female breadwinner in Australia, although it is closer to 27 per cent in inner Sydney.

New mum Vilja Roman had little choice but to go back to work fulltime when her son Feliks was less than a year old. Under the terms of her contract, she would have had to pay back her maternity leave if she didn’t.  But Ms Roman, 35, felt judged.

She said: “I remember some of my colleagues were a bit surprised that I was going back fulltime. In my mothers’ group, others went back part-time or stayed at home, I was the only one who went back fulltime.

“The decision to go back fulltime is where I felt most judged. I don’t know how much of that was my personal feelings, as opposed to how much others judged me.”

Heather Gridley, an honorary ­fellow in psychology, said judgment often came when women felt pressured to defend their own choice.

“In doing that, you point to the other person as having made a less valid choice,” she said.

“Often, they are not choices at all. It can be quite painful. When you don’t get validation, self-doubt starts to emerge. I think women are particularly vulnerable to that.”

Anita Vitanova, founder of inner westmums.com.au, said she found mothers felt judged “constantly”.

“Women do judge each other, mainly to justify and validate their own choices,” she said. “Very often it won’t be a direct attack but it will be more of the ‘I would never’ dig.

“It takes a lot of confidence to know who you really are when becoming a mother and it’s not something you can prepare or practise.”

Gillian Franklin, the chief executive of the company that carried out the survey, said women should be ­encouraging their friends.

“We need to release women from the guilt, and help them make choices on their own terms,” she said.


UK: Jeremy Corbyn is betraying the working class people he claims to represent

The problem is not that he is too Left-wing and radical (as some critics argue). No, I believe he has been too timid and cautious.

With the exception of his demand that Britain’s nuclear deterrent, Trident, is scrapped, he has failed to assert himself on the great issues about which he was so very vocal as a backbencher for more than 30 years.

June’s referendum on British membership [of the EU] is by far the biggest issue facing the country for a generation.

But Corbyn’s position has been pathetic — particularly since he voted against Britain remaining in was then known as the Common Market in 1975. At the time, he was a political protégé of Tony Benn, one of the leaders of the No campaign.

Back then, he regarded the EU as a malign attempt to build an anti-democratic empire that damaged workers’ rights.

This brings me to my most serious charge against Corbyn: he has betrayed traditional working- class Labour voters.

The truth is that these people are far more likely to be anti-EU than middle-class voters. This is in part because they are more naturally patriotic — possessing strong local links, they also come from families who, in the past, have taken up arms to fight for King and Country.

As George Orwell observed, this marks them out from those middle-class Labour intellectuals, many of whom despise patriotism, are embarrassed by this country’s proud history and don’t espouse its traditional values.

But there is much more to Corbyn’s betrayal.

It is unarguable that the working class have suffered most from the UK’s membership of the EU.  Mass immigration — the result of the EU’s open borders policy — has been particularly ruinous. The import of cheap foreign labour has driven down wages, and in many cases has cost British working people their jobs.

It has also put massive extra pressure on public services, such as education and the NHS. It makes it far more difficult, too, for young people to get council housing.

Most disgraceful, many communities across the country feel they were never consulted about the policies which have led to their areas’ character and economy having changed beyond recognition as a result of mass immigration over the past 20 or 30 years.

Indeed, as the author Tom Bower recently revealed, Blair presided over a silent conspiracy to change the face of Britain for ever with mass immigration.

By comparison, middle-class Labour voters have been more able to deal with the challenge. They enjoy cheap cleaners and are better able to get their children into the best schools.

It’s not surprising, therefore, that opinion polls show that 80 per cent of middle-class Labour voters want us to remain in the EU, while about 50 per cent of working-class Labour voters want us to leave.

To be fair to Corbyn, it is not just Labour that has turned its back on the British working class. The same is true for the trade unions, many of which are fanatically pro-EU.

Also, the Daily Mirror, the tabloid which for years was a defiant mouthpiece for the traditions of the Labour movement, seems now to share this Blairite disdain.

For example, it has become a cheerleader for the EU — shamefully downplaying the admission by businessman Stuart Rose, a key spokesman for the Remain campaign, that wages would rise in Britain if we quit the EU.

For his part, I fear that Corbyn’s cowardice — combined with the blackmailing tactics of rebellious Blairites — means Labour risks losing touch with its core support.

This is not just a problem for the Labour Party. It is a reflection of a wider malaise and a dishonesty in politics — marked by scaremongering from the Remain camp.

But Labour is especially vulnerable. If Corbyn won’t speak up for working-class voters, others will.

It is worth remembering that Ukip came second to Labour in more than 100 seats in the Midlands and North of England in last year’s General Election. In the future, Labour’s weakness could be exploited by populist politicians much further to the Right than Ukip.

It is not too late for Corbyn to change strategy. If he swung Labour behind the Leave campaign, he could electrify the debate.

Also, crucially, it would give a voice to the working-class voters treated with contempt by the Labour establishment over the past decade. Such a move would be a great day for British democracy.


'I'll sue', says man wrongly charged with stirring up race-hate

A Twitter user mistakenly charged with stirring up race-hate has vowed to sue Scotland Yard over the blunder.

Matthew Doyle, 46, triggered a storm online after writing that he had confronted a Muslim woman on the streets of Croydon about the Brussels terror attacks and she had given him a ‘mealy-mouthed’ response.

He was arrested over his comments on Wednesday by Croydon Police Community Safety Unit, taken into custody, charged with posting material ‘likely to stir up racial hatred’ and was due to appear in court yesterday morning.

But then police were forced into an embarrassing U-turn by the Crown Prosecution Service on Friday night, charges were dropped and PR executive Mr Doyle was released.

The Met was told it did not have the power to make the controversial charging decision and had failed to consult the Attorney-General, the Government’s top law officer, or the CPS.

Last night LSE graduate Mr Doyle told The Mail on Sunday he planned to take legal action over his ordeal.

‘I cannot understand why I was detained, my flat trashed, my passport seized and two PCs, two tablets and my phone taken,’ he said.

‘I was denied a shave, shower, food. I was stripped of any dignity to appear in court without looking like a dishevelled hobo that I am not.’

He accused ‘nameless Twitter trolls’ of ‘fanning the flames’ and making death threats against him, and went on: ‘For the Met to bow to social media rows - it is not only foolish of them but I will be making a complaint against them and damages for trashing my flat, taking all my electronic stuff from my flat and forcing me to leave London.’

Scotland Yard said: ‘Matthew Doyle, 46, of South Croydon was charged by police on Friday, 25 March, with an offence under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986.

‘Following discussion with the Crown Prosecution Service, Mr Doyle is no longer charged with the offence and will not be appearing at court.


'Hard to watch': Afghans react to $6m Australian film aimed at asylum seekers

A movie commissioned by Australia’s immigration department to deter Afghan asylum seekers has had its premiere on local TV, seeking to reinforce a widely held view that unauthorised travel to Australia is not worth the risk.

The Journey is a lavish production depicting hopeful asylum seekers who meet tragic fates crossing the Indian Ocean.

Underwritten by $6m in Australian taxpayers’ money and filmed in three countries, it was shown on Friday on two channels in Afghanistan, the world’s second-largest source of refugees and migrants in 2015, after Syria.

“It was hard to watch. It made me very upset,” Ali Reza, an 18-year-old tailor said about the film. “I know they were actors, but these things really happen to Afghans.”

Put It Out There Pictures, which produced the film for $4.34m, says on its website the movie aims to inform audiences “about the futility of investing in people smugglers, the perils of the trip, and the hardline policies that await them if they do reach Australian waters”.

Judging from the responses of scores of young men who spoke to the Guardian, that goal was largely achieved.  “It was a good movie,” said Mostafa Ebadi, 23. “It showed the lies smugglers tell passengers before leaving.”

Mohammad Tawab, 23, said he had been particularly moved by scenes of refugees languishing in an Indonesian prison. For Yama Taheri, who was playing football in a downtown Kabul park, the most disturbing sequence was one in which three brothers drown. “It made me think that if I try to go with friends, this will be our destiny,” he said.

Before the current Syrian conflict forced millions to flee that country, Afghanistan was by far the largest producer of refugees in the world for more than three decades. Neighbouring countries Pakistan and Iran hosted most of the displaced Afghans, but Afghans were also the largest national group who sought to reach Australia by boat.

Almost all Afghans who have reached Australia by boat have been found to be refugees legally requiring protection. Each year since 2009, between 96% and 100% of Afghan asylum seekers have had their claims for refugee status upheld.

But in recent years fewer and fewer Afghans have set their sights on Australia. Harsher asylum policies and warning campaigns have deterred many. The vast majority of Afghan asylum seekers in 2015 went to Europe, with more than 150,000 to Germany alone.

For three years Daud Hossaini, 42, planned to join his brother in Australia. As asylum policies tightened, he hesitated, but retained hope that the forthcoming federal election might bring change. But on Friday, after seeing the movie, he finally buried his hopes of moving to Australia.  “If I die on the way, what’s the point of going?” he said.

Lapis Communications, who promoted and adapted the movie to Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq and Pakistan, denied they were producing government propaganda.  “The backers of the film are credited, that is neither hidden or denied,” said Sarah-Jean Cunningham, director of operations and business development. “More importantly, the ideas and values around the film are grounded in addressing a very serious and tragic issue – with the ultimate objective of saving lives.”

Cunningham denied the fee earned by Lapis – $1.63m – was excessive. “The cost is reflective of the extent of that significant scope of work,” she said.

However, not everyone bought the message. As security worsens and employment becomes scarcer, Afghans will continue to leave. Humayoon, 29, who saw part of the movie before rushing off to a wedding, said he was only staying in Afghanistan as long as he had a job.  “If I can’t feed my family, what am I supposed to do?”



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: